42% don’t like the graphics. It is technically a minority, but it’s definitely not a good sign to have this much…
2 Likes
There is a different between don’t like graphics and prefer better graphics but I still like them. Everyone prefers better graphics. I also prefer better graphics. But I still like them a lot. Having this in mind where did you see that 42% don’t like them.
PS: Also there must be some number of people who have vote. For example 100, are not so many but is a good point to start. If there are for example 10 who vote, this does not mean anything.
3 Likes
why dont you just let me have aguements with strangers regarding the graphics of a game which wont change? 
I am just arguing what my opinion is, and also how the devs may have thought, and try to explain it.
i sadly have to do so a lot, I expected gamers would be more informed nowadays.
Also There is not much new here to discuss, so only graphics remain. sadly. no beta stuff or beta forum to discuss about strategies and best civs 
2 Likes
lol sorry I forgot to paste the link xD
in the post they linked, 200 answers, 12% wanted a complete overhaul and therefore wont be happy.
30% thought they could “fix” it. I assume thats mostly the textures/animations fraction, which does have valid concerns. Especially regarding animations.
But I assume they already fixed most of it, so they will probably continue with it.
btw the other % were happy before and now, or after the changes shown in the newer gameplay.
I would say 12% being completely unhappy will always be the case.
1 Like
Um, this clearly states that a few tweaks can bring 30% of that 42% over to like the graphics
4 Likes
Oh yeah, I’m part of that 30%. I believe I could like the graphics if they were worked on, after all, I really like the X2019 graphics. I just don’t believe they will work on it anymore, with release being so close.
1 Like
Obviously. You don’t have to have a majority disliking what they see to conclude that’s an ominous sign. Imagine if each company just waited to hit that 51% in reviews to call a success. That’s such a naïve rationale.
Opinions are too polarized which only shows how miserably the game failed to catch a first good impression. Then again, inside the official forums you certainly have positive bias towards the game in all those polls by all the die-hard fans, which is reasonable. On other platforms, you can hear way worse critique and by many more people.
On top of that, ‘can be fixed’ is also a too broad statement. Each one may have something completely different in mind when saying that and that may be not even be fixable at this point. Let alone that ‘can be fixed or changed’ doesn’t mean that it will.
I still think they should release an Ultra graphics DLC like they did for DE, this should satisfy the graphic glorifiers
1 Like
dude. if you make a singleplayer game (75% according to devs and forums here dont play multi), you best better make sure that your graphics are on point.
what type of logic is that?: f the graphics for singleplayer LUL LUL
aoe is not a story-driven game. at least nothing you cannot read in history books.
1 Like
As Heinrich1996100 mentioned above, there is a difference in storage that needs between steam (50GB and Microsoft storage 99GB). Most likely this is the difference with and without Graphics dlc. We don’t know if they change the texture metallic colors or they just have better resolution, but it is almost sure that there will be an enhanced graphic dlc.
3 Likes
Why though? You buy the game to play it, not look at the scenery
4 Likes
we clearly have different standards and worldviews.
I cannot get into this topic without getting modded at some point in my post.
But let’s just say: there’s a difference between game design in singleplayer vs multi.
Now, if they so magically happened to have combined this in this game, then all the power to them and we will all be individualistically the judge in a few months.
I’m not sure why are you separating these two things. By definition, video-games have a strong visual dimension, inseparable from the rest of the game. When you play, you look at something and you typically want that something to look good.
Even when you approach this argument from the other side and say you remove or dump down visually all sorts of things for the shake of readability, then again you directly admit the importance of the visual aspect.
Readability in itself is an argument that glorifies the visual importance -in the sense that what you look and how you look at it can greatly interfere with your overall experience-, which is why it wants to dump down so many things.
Now, I can agree that the degree of that importance varies from game to game and I guess that’s the matter of the debate here but you can’t in all seriousness say that you buy the game to play it and not to look at the scenery. We’re playing video games here not leap frogs.
2 Likes
Worldviews do not even enter the equation when we are talking about video games, lol
Of course, this is obvious but this this doesn’t answer my question
Of course, I totally agree but different people have different standards, you can’t please everyone. So you go after the as many people as you can please, which they have obviously done as shown by polls, comment sections, ect
Readability is important to me, yes but I don’t agree with gigantic weapons and undersized buildings. They fixed the former, now they need to fix the latter
When you buy a game, what keeps you playing? Most people will say, “the gameplay” or “the storyline” or “the universe”, not “it looks good”
I absolutely understand why you would want better graphics, immersion is important for games, especially for RTS. But most of the community likes the graphics or thinks small tweaks is all it needs. If you want a graphic overhaul and don’t get it, sorry but they aren’t going to drastically change the graphics just to get a few extra bucks. The best you can hope for is that they have an Ultra graphics DLC that enhances the graphics to your liking
1 Like
Indeed, does AoE4 direction please as many people as possible?
If we check for the RTS genre the polls, sale stats, reviews, comment sections,
it sounds like AoE4 is going in the wrong direction.
Here as example Polls from a crowd funded RTS project, yes only RTS people can be so desperate to fund AAA RTS on kickstarter. Over 15.000 people who did pay for the project did vote this:
I did not ask you about graphics,
I asked how AoE4 is supposed to sell based on their concept, if it’s apparently very wrong.
Several available statistics and polls that have been made over the years show
majority of DOTA2 and MOBA players in general play almost nothing else,
they are not interested into RTS games.
Like 90% of RTS players prefer Single-player and slower pace,
not even 10% wants Multiplayer and fast pace, also they mostly dislike MOBAs.
So why should those for “MOBA” and E-Sport Market designed RTS games succeed,
if there is no market for them?
2 Likes
Blobbing. What does Spellforce 3 look like to you? Same goes for Total War. I see nothing about graphics here or on the page with all the polls though, so what is your point?
Now that I think about it, your post probably has nothing to do with the graphics, even though you were responding to a post that was entirely focused on graphics but of course, that is what you do. 
AoE4 seems to follow this poll as they have stressed how they worked very hard on the campaigns, plus you get the MP crowd in there as well as they have worked on that.
This has no value as we haven’t seen an actual gameplay video, so we don’t know whether the game is fast-paced (AoE3) or slower (AoE2)
Base building has been enhanced in AoE4, so Check
Campaigns have been enhanced, so Check
Tactics have been added (walls, forest ambushes, maybe more, again, we don’t know the full extent of gameplay) so Check and Check
Better AI is of course wanted, AoE2 DE delivered so hopefully AoE4 delivers. No points
Cover system would be difficult to implement in a medieval game I would think.
I agree with this and I don’t think they focused on it enough, so… Not Check
Not p2w/micro-transactions Check
Mm is a difficult subject. AoE2 I would say has quite a bit of Micromanagement but at the same time, doesn’t, so no points
We haven’t seen gameplay so no reason to assume MOBA elements, so Check
Too much DLC? Lol DLCs mean more content, for people saying they want more focus on SP they are pretty hypocritical
Gameplay speed, we don’t know yet no points
blobbing…so far doesn’t look like this is a thing check
Unit caps. 200 is pretty low imo, so hopefully they have higher unit limits but we don’t know. So right now it is no check but could become a check in the future.
Overall points
Checks=7
No Checks=2
No points given=3
2 Likes
What are the MOBA elements incorporated in aoe4? I don’t understand why people are saying there are any.
1 Like
I post images from all the games we have heard that have better graphics than AoE4.
Spellforce 3 a zoom out battle with many units
Battle for Middle Earth 2
Ancestors Legacy
Company of heroes 3
Even bigger zoom out at AoE4
I think the first picture is really bad. Spellforce 3 game is not mend to be a RTS with a lot of units fight between. No need to say anything for BfME2 and for Ancestors Legacy.
I can understand if you say that you like the CoH3 image more than the AoE4, but could you recognize these units what they are and to who they belong? And imagine it to be in hand to hand combat with the opponent units. Would you recognize any unit without a flag above it? And I don’t speak now to exist 200 units in screen like the AoE4 screenshot. Dark realistic graphics have disadvantages. Possible via settings you will be able to change the brightness of the game. Lets try it now:
Make the scene a little more dark.
Lets make it a little more dark:
Lets make it so dark as CoH3
You see that the realistic dark graphics lead to visibility problems. But yes, I agree, graphics in CoH 3 are great. But CoH 3 game is not mend to be a game with a lot of micro management of units like AoE4 neither to have many units in screen. And yes, the last image looks much more realistic than the first one in AoE4. But the game will not be playable…
3 Likes
Also, why can’t a multiplayer-focused game have a good singleplayer experience?
Starcraft 2 is super fast paced, heavily focused on multiplayer, yet it has one of the best sp campaigns I’ve ever seen in an RTS. (Edit: not to mention the cartoony graphics and unrealistic scaling of units and buildings.)
4 Likes